the tribulation is really starting to speed up it's pace.
i just read that atleast 3 types of animal and plant life go extinct every hour.
global warming threatens the entire planet, crimes against women and children are at a all time high, honeybees dying off for unexplained reasons, the threat of nuclear war, the ravage of infectious disease.
A) If evolution is how we got here, then mankind is going into total annihilation and extinction.
B) If evolution is false, then the only thing that can save mankind from himself is Jehovah!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I`m voting for alternative A) (as a long term scenario - thousands of years - but no, no "Jehovah").
i`m helping a friend translate a book (from danish to english), and we desperately need help finding a quote from "millenial dawn 2-the time is at hand".
the passage reads, in "studies in the scriptures", volume 2 ("the time is at hand"), chapter 5, last column, under the heading:.
"connecting the prophetic chain.
Atlantis! Thanks !!!
and how do/did you imagine it would start.. i say, it would start a big cloud in the sky .
.
.
I used to imagine it as big rocks falling from the sky, like in the book of Joshua, and/or like a new flood, masses of water coming over the mountains, crushing the little town we lived in. I used to have nightmares about that.
i`m helping a friend translate a book (from danish to english), and we desperately need help finding a quote from "millenial dawn 2-the time is at hand".
the passage reads, in "studies in the scriptures", volume 2 ("the time is at hand"), chapter 5, last column, under the heading:.
"connecting the prophetic chain.
Hi. I`m helping a friend translate a book (from Danish to English), and we desperately need help finding a quote from "Millenial Dawn 2-The Time is at Hand". The passage reads, in "Studies in the Scriptures", volume 2 ("The Time is at Hand"), chapter 5, last column, under the heading:
"Connecting The Prophetic Chain
In the preceding chapter we presented evidence showing that the "Times of the Gentiles," or their lease of dominion, will run fully out with the year A.D. 1914, and that at that time they will be overturned* and Christ's Kingdom fully established. That the Lord must be present, and set up his Kingdom, and exercise his great power so as to dash the nations to pieces as a potter's vessel, is then clearly fixed; for it is "in the days of these kings"--before their overthrow--i.e., before A.D. 1914--that the God of heaven shall set up his Kingdom. And IT shall break in pieces and consume all these. (Dan. 2:44) And in harmony with this, we see all about us evidence of the beginning of the smiting, shaking, and overturning of the present powers, preparatory to the establishment of the kingdom "which cannot be moved"--the strong government."
...the thing is, in the original text of Millenial Dawn, the passage is a little bit different, but it should be in the same chapter, under the same heading. When the WatchTower republished Millenial Dawn, under the new title "Studies in the Scriptures", they "tampered with the text", to rewrite the events of the fiasco of 1914 a bit...so the tampered-with text should read something like this:
»In the preceding chapter we presented evidence showing that the “Times of the Gentiles,” or their lease of dominion, will run fully out with the year A.D. 1914, and that at that time they will all be overturned and Christ's Kingdom fully established. That the Lord must be present, and set up his Kingdom, and exercise his great power so as to dash the nations to pieces as a potter's vessel, before 1914 A.D., is then clearly fixed …« (Mill.D. 2, p. approx. 170, published 1894; italics by me).
See? The fixed the 1914-thing...but I need the exact wording of the quote. If anyone can help...it would be greatly appreaciated!
we often hear it said: love the sinner, but; hate the sin.. we try and reform the child molester.
we put career criminals through rehabiliation.
we let the drunk driver off with a fine and a warning over and over until an innocent family is wiped out.. why separate the deed from the doer?
One of your best posts ever, Narkissos.
we often hear it said: love the sinner, but; hate the sin.. we try and reform the child molester.
we put career criminals through rehabiliation.
we let the drunk driver off with a fine and a warning over and over until an innocent family is wiped out.. why separate the deed from the doer?
Terry:
People speak about "free will" without really examining what they are saying. It is not an absolute. It is a very, very narrow and dangerous mental construct much misunderstood.
We follow our whims when we are young unless we are stopped or sidetracked. Then, we change our strategy. We either become clever and deceitful to get our way or we conform and become group-think automatons. It is our essential character which makes us one or the other.
Rare is the individual. Rare is the self-identity which understands how to modify whims, longings and desires well enough to order them sequentially according to social norms without trading one's volition for crumbs.
We can want, but; we can't decide what our wants are. We can postpone satisfaction and delay gratification, but; we can't sublimate ourselves into an authentic alternative personality.
In that case, why are they responsible for their actions. And responsible how? In a an absolute "moral" sense? Obviously not (according to your view), as the "right-doers" have only more intelligently adapted to social norms, social constructs!
But I don`t give a shit about "social norms", social constructs, and if that is all morality is, if that is the basis for how you deem people to be "accountable" for their acts, then your condemnation is worth nothing.
I`m glad you cleared up your view on morality and "free will". If "wrong-doers" are merely trespassing some social construct, I don`t consider your condemnation of the persona in the above mentioned hypothetical situation to mean anything anymore. If all he did was trespass some social construct, I don`t consider that to be "wrong", at least not in an absolute moral sense, because according to your view, there is no such thing. Why you then insist on "accountability", I do not know.
i pretty much don't think much of christendom.
but why do christians insist on holding such an unholdable position with the trinity.. the bible i agree holds proof for both trinity and nontrinity positions.. i still don't get why that christians other than catholics would hold such an untenable position as god came down to earth but didn't, and he prayed ( talked ) to himself a lot.. .
i remember a comedy sketch were some kids were stumping a nun in catholic school with question on the trinity and the eurachrist..
Zico summed it up. You don`t understand trinitarianism 5go. What you presented in your first post is called Modalism. It was condemned as heresy by the church Fathers of the 3rd Century. When the WTS presents the "heresy" of trinitarianism, they present it as Modalism. Because they are idiots. To get a real view of what trinitarianism is, you can even get good information from Wikipedia:
i pretty much don't think much of christendom.
but why do christians insist on holding such an unholdable position with the trinity.. the bible i agree holds proof for both trinity and nontrinity positions.. i still don't get why that christians other than catholics would hold such an untenable position as god came down to earth but didn't, and he prayed ( talked ) to himself a lot.. .
i remember a comedy sketch were some kids were stumping a nun in catholic school with question on the trinity and the eurachrist..
I still don't get why that christians other than catholics would hold such an untenable position as god came down to earth but didn't, and he prayed ( talked ) to himself a lot.
That is not trinitarianism, it`s modalism. Trinitarians consider it heresy.
dear all,.
there's not much that makes me wince, not at the movies anyway, but those things that have, have inevitably stayed in the memory.. i saw it a long time ago at the cinema, but the reservoir dogs scene where michael madsen cuts a policeman's ear off to the track stuck in the middle with you, was one such scene.
certainly couldn't watch it again.
The murder scene in "Irreversible" (with Monica Bellucci).
dear all,.
there's not much that makes me wince, not at the movies anyway, but those things that have, have inevitably stayed in the memory.. i saw it a long time ago at the cinema, but the reservoir dogs scene where michael madsen cuts a policeman's ear off to the track stuck in the middle with you, was one such scene.
certainly couldn't watch it again.
Yeah, "Hostel" in its entirety. Also, the scene in the re-make of the Exorcist, where Megan comes down the stairs like a spider (you know, if you`ve seen it). Also, the scene from the Ring, where the ghost/demon-woman comes out of the TV-set. Ahhh, I didn`t sleep well that night, lol.
